SynthesisSystematic reviews2017
A systematic review of the processes used to link clinical trial registrations to their published results.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Non-invasive neuromodulation for migraine and cluster headache: a systematic review of clinical trials.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2019Pooled it
- Registration of published randomized trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2018Pooled it
- The clinical trials landscape for glioblastoma: is it adequate to develop new treatments?Neuro-oncology · 2018Pooled it
- Article
- Goals and strategies for the indexing of publication types and study designs.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2026Article
- Determinants of publication likelihood and timeliness for clinical studies.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- A New Process Model of Study Identification Specific to the Identification of Randomised Studies for Systematic Reviews of Medical Interventions.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2025Article
- Article
- Evidence-b(i)ased practice: Selective and inadequate reporting in early childhood autism intervention research.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2024Review
- Evaluating the discoverability of supporting research materials in ClinicalTrials.gov for US federally funded COVID-19 clinical studies.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 2024Article
- Availability of results of clinical trials registered on EU Clinical Trials Register: cross sectional audit study.BMJ medicine · 2024Article
- Linking Cancer Clinical Trials to their Result Publications.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2024Article
- Time to Publication for Randomized Clinical Trials Presented as Abstracts at Three Gastroenterology and Hepatology Conferences in 2017.Gastro hep advances · 2023Article
- Predicting Publication of Clinical Trials Using Structured and Unstructured Data: Model Development and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- regCOVID: Tracking publications of registered COVID-19 studies.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Results publications are inadequately linked to trial registrations: An automated pipeline and evaluation of German university medical centers.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2022Article
- Clinical trial registration was associated with lower risk of bias compared with non-registered trials among trials included in systematic reviews.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- Identifying unreported links between ClinicalTrials.gov trial registrations and their published results.Research synthesis methods · 2022Article
- A web-based tool for automatically linking clinical trials to their publications.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- The automation of relevant trial registration screening for systematic review updates: an evaluation study on a large dataset of ClinicalTrials.gov registrations.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStudies measuring the completeness and consistency of trial registration and reporting rely on linking registries with bibliographic databases. In this systematic review, we quantified the processes used to identify these links.
methodsPubMed and Embase databases were searched from inception to May 2016 for studies linking trial registries with bibliographic databases. The processes used to establish these links were categorised as automatic when the registration identifier was available in the bibliographic database or publication, or manual when linkage required inference or contacting of trial investigators. The number of links identified by each process was extracted where available. Linear regression was used to determine whether the proportions of links available via automatic processes had increased over time.
resultsIn 43 studies that examined cohorts of registry entries, 24 used automatic and manual processes to find articles; 3 only automatic; and 11 only manual (5 did not specify). Twelve studies reported results for both manual and automatic processes and showed that a median of 23% (range from 13 to 42%) included automatic links to articles, while 17% (range from 5 to 42%) of registry entries required manual processes to find articles. There was no evidence that the proportion of registry entries with automatic links had increased (R
conclusionsThe linkage of trial registries to their corresponding publications continues to require extensive manual processes. We did not find that the use of automatic linkage has increased over time. Further investigation is needed to inform approaches that will ensure publications are properly linked to trial registrations, thus enabling efficient monitoring of trial reporting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.